Glen, n all, I actually read most of this before I am passing it on to you, a new record for me. It relates to Wing Nuts. https://blog.hotwhopper.com/2016/09/climate-science-denial-rational.html
I found it interesting because it relates to an attempt to state the minimum conditions for a productive dialogue between people who disagree. So these folks meet the first two. 1. A commitment to logic. Otherwise inconsistencies don't hurt, right? 2. A commitment to the possibility of facts and a desire to find them. They fail on the third criterion: 3. A commitment to respectful dialogue, avoidance of contempt-speech, and an honest attempt to Steelman (sensu Ropellae) the other guy's argument. Nick
- .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. . FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
